Jump to content

2019 BOA San Antonio


Recommended Posts

Maybe it's a branding thing? Instead of being the San Antonio super regional it should be the Southern Super regional. There is no doubt that this one is owned by the Texas bands with the deepest competitive field there is in the country. I've been to GN twice, one year with Texas bands in attendance and one year without. There really was a noticeable difference between the two. GN will always be GN and draw from all over the country. It's a great experience that would be hard to replicate anywhere else. However, if there were a Southern Super Regional wouldn't it be more attractive for out of state bands? There would be a lot of prestige and recognition that comes with winning that one. If out of state bands are that good then they should come to the deepest competitive contest there is.   Given the depth of the field, there should be preliems, semi's, and finals. This event is just too deep to see a band once and have their fate decided.  Anyway, there is a ton of potential here should BOA decide to take a hard look at this contest and what it could be. 

 

I would be willing to bet that such discussions and reviews are being done, but they can't do anything without all the logistics behind it - contracts with venues, hotels, various vendors, etc. With UIL recently passing the every year area contest I am also willing to bet that MFA/BOA is waiting to see how that plays out before committing to anything regarding expansion for San Antonio. There are lots of balls in the air that have to land properly in order for such a thing to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be willing to bet that such discussions and reviews are being done, but they can't do anything without all the logistics behind it - contracts with venues, hotels, various vendors, etc. With UIL recently passing the every year area contest I am also willing to bet that MFA/BOA is waiting to see how that plays out before committing to anything regarding expansion for San Antonio. There are lots of balls in the air that have to land properly in order for such a thing to happen.

as the UIL decision to do a yearly area was approved by the same directors that compete in BOA SA - I think this was to force MFA's hand on the topic - it will be interesting to see how it plays out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard for me to look at last year's San Antonio prelims recap without getting angry. I just don't know why anybody would think it's a good idea to determine finalists and class champions based on the results from two completely different panels of judges. It's just so obviously stupid that I'm surprised the idea ever gained traction. I understand the desire to include more groups, but this is not the way to accommodate them. There absolutely needs to be one panel determining class champions and which groups make finals. It's too important to the participating bands to have their chances crushed by BOA's lack of panel consistency. All groups with an actual shot at making finals need the same set of eyes and ears judging them.

 

To test whether I'm being irrational, I actually gathered data comparing the prelims results at Nationals (which uses 2 different panels) to the eventually chosen finalists and class champions. Maybe this has been done already. I took the highest 4 scores from each prelims day, and then the next highest 4 regardless of panel. There are a few caveats to this method. First and foremost, class champions and finalists are chosen based on a semis performance. This means that a group might give a rough performance in prelims, but a great performance in semis; however, I strongly feel that most of the semis bands generally give pretty consistent performances from one round to the next of the same contest, and so most of the differences are due to panel changes. Another potential caveat: with the implementation of this new Super Regional system, BOA might have taken some precautions to make sure that the panels are more consistent. I'm not sure what those would include, really, besides having the chief judge dictate scores to some extent. One final caveat: the proportion of bands I took directly into finals based on each panel doesn't exactly match the proportion used at Super Regionals, but it's pretty much the best one possible.

 

Anyway, I did this for the past 5 national championships. These data show that this method of selecting class champions and finalists has never really been accurate.

 

In 2018, Franklin and Fishers would have made finals over Homestead and O'Fallon Township. Norton would have won the class A championship instead of Bourbon County. (Norton instead was 3rd in their class.)

 

In 2017, Homestead would have made finals instead of Union. Dobyns-Bennett would have won the class AAA championship instead of Castle.

 

In 2016, neither Ronald Reagan nor Castle would have made finals. Instead, Union would have made it in their place. Carmel would have won the AAAA championship instead of Avon.

 

In 2015, the finalists actually match! But Broken Arrow would have won the class AAAA championship instead of Hebron.

 

In 2014, Lake Central and Dobyns-Bennett would have made finals instead of Marian Catholic and Union. The class champions were accurate.

 

Just for kicks, I went all the way back to 2006, just to see if things were a little better (or worse) back then. Turns out, it's about the same. Ben Davis would have made finals instead of James Bowie. LD Bell would have won the class AAA championship instead of The Woodlands.

 

Now, I don't want to suggest that there's some perfectly objective way of selecting class champions and finalists, or that using one panel will give you the "correct" result. But some of these older results are definitely due to one panel being more generous than the other, and that's what we'll continue to see at the Super Regional until the process is changed. Obviously, it will be nice to get some more data from actual Super Regionals in the coming years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how do they handle 3 days of competition without dividing it up into two panels of judges?  There's no way a single panel could sit there all day Thursday and all day Friday and not have complete and utter brain overload.  I really don't know the best way to handle it, and I don't care for the two panel system either due to the very reasons you mentioned, but I'm just not sure what IS the best way to deal with a competition this large.

 

EDIT: I'm obviously referring to GN in the 3 days of competition mentioned, but it's just as grueling if the same panel had to judge 100 bands over two days in a Super Regional like San Antonio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how do they handle 3 days of competition without dividing it up into two panels of judges?  There's no way a single panel could sit there all day Thursday and all day Friday and not have complete and utter brain overload.  I really don't know the best way to handle it, and I don't care for the two panel system either due to the very reasons you mentioned, but I'm just not sure what IS the best way to deal with a competition this large.

 

EDIT: I'm obviously referring to GN in the 3 days of competition mentioned, but it's just as grueling if the same panel had to judge 100 bands over two days in a Super Regional like San Antonio.

 

The best way would be to mimic the GN structure. You would have to divide up prelims, but then only semifinalist selection would be affected. Frankly, I'd rather semifinalists be affected than finalists and class champions, which are considerably greater accomplishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best way would be to mimic the GN structure. You would have to divide up prelims, but then only semifinalist selection would be affected. Frankly, I'd rather semifinalists be affected than finalists and class champions, which are considerably greater accomplishments.

 

I guess I'm not really understanding the difference between how they are doing GN and how they did San Antonio last year.  I thought they were already doing them both the same, but I can see how it would be different since we do not have a semi-finals in SA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm not really understanding the difference between how they are doing GN and how they did San Antonio last year.  I thought they were already doing them both the same, but I can see how it would be different since we do not have a semi-finals in SA.

 

The main difference is that they're using one panel to determine finalists and class champions at Nationals, but they're using two different panels and throwing all the scores together at San Antonio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might actually be time for BOA to use a qualifying system for BOA San Antonio prelims. I know they don't want to be exclusive, but when you have this many groups, you need to find a way to manage them effectively. For example, maybe to qualify for BOA San Antonio you need to make finals at an earlier regional. That system might be a little too exclusive, though, since, for example, in 2009, Reagan missed finals at Arlington but managed to sneak into finals at San Antonio. So, maybe finishing in the top half of prelims would be a better criterion? How many different groups would that have been last year? I feel like BOA has been regularly expanding their regional-reach in Texas, so that finding a good early season regional to qualify for San Antonio wouldn't be that much of an issue for the vast majority of TX bands. Also, it might be smart business, if it increases regional demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve often wondered why bands don’t have to qualify for Supers and GN. I understand that they want to be inclusive and all that, but it seems like regionals would be good for that. I can imagine how much money they would lose though if MFA handled it this way.

 

I still prefer that they just add the extra semi-finals round, so that everyone can participate. Also, it would be annoying for groups to have to worry about whether or not they'll qualify for San Antonio, with all the travel plans involved. I suppose groups already deal with that sort of uncertainty on the UIL circuit, but having to do it for BOA as well might be a bit much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might actually be time for BOA to use a qualifying system for BOA San Antonio prelims. I know they don't want to be exclusive, but when you have this many groups, you need to find a way to manage them effectively. For example, maybe to qualify for BOA San Antonio you need to make finals at an earlier regional. That system might be a little too exclusive, though, since, for example, in 2009, Reagan missed finals at Arlington but managed to sneak into finals at San Antonio. So, maybe finishing in the top half of prelims would be a better criterion? How many different groups would that have been last year? I feel like BOA has been regularly expanding their regional-reach in Texas, so that finding a good early season regional to qualify for San Antonio wouldn't be that much of an issue for the vast majority of TX bands. Also, it might be smart business, if it increases regional demand.

I see what you are saying. But that would not be very effective just because in BOA bands can easily pick which regional too attend. Such as the DFW and the WACO regional, I believe a couple bands are doing both?

 

And for bands out of state wont do that mainly cuz BOA SA isnt just only for texas bands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying. But that would not be very effective just because in BOA bands can easily pick which regional too attend. Such as the DFW and the WACO regional, I believe a couple bands are doing both?

 

And for bands out of state wont do that mainly cuz BOA SA isnt just only for texas bands.

Also, how do you plan to attend a major competition on short notice? There are significant budget implications.

 

It's not very realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see a world in which one years results at regionals determine qualification for the next years super regional (or at least gives you first chance to signup) to assist with the logistics nightmare. I know there’s a whole other side of the arguement against that, but just spitballing.

 

Personally I don’t see BOA ever implanting anything like that, and I think that’s good. It is music for ALL after all, and while there are many bands at BOA SA with zero chance of making finals, these bands are there for the experience of playing in the dome and being inspired by the elite echelon of txbands.

 

Semifinals makes the most sense and i think there may be serious consideration for this if the pool of bands continues to be this large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still prefer that they just add the extra semi-finals round, so that everyone can participate. Also, it would be annoying for groups to have to worry about whether or not they'll qualify for San Antonio, with all the travel plans involved. I suppose groups already deal with that sort of uncertainty on the UIL circuit, but having to do it for BOA as well might be a bit much.

I agree - I think adding a qualifier would discourage participation in Super Regional and Grand Nats - when G Nats has 100 bands participate, how many have ever (that year or otherwise) finished in finals or even the top half of a regional. Participation is a money maker for MFA and limiting that will eliminate the need for a stadium like Lucas Oil for so few bands.

 

I think it would be better to add a more robust SR program - like a semi-finals to SA or any SR that has a certain level of participation 

 

at the end of the day - this is a business for MFA and revenue is king 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the first time a Super Regional has been larger than GN in attendees? I believe the Indy SR also has more bands enrolled this fall than GN does or maybe I’m misremembering.

I believe so. In 2018 there was 89 bands attending BOA San Antonio. But for GN 109 attended

 

2017- GN 100 SA- 68

 

2016- GN 100 SA 63

 

So seems like each year SA gets larger and larger and obviously more competitive like crazy each year.

 

And GN dropped alot this year and each year it really only gets interesting if TX bands attends. :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe so. In 2018 there was 89 bands attending BOA San Antonio. But for GN 109 attended

 

2017- GN 100 SA- 68

 

2016- GN 100 SA 63

 

So seems like each year SA gets larger and larger and obviously more competitive like crazy each year.

 

And GN dropped alot this year and each year it really only gets interesting if TX bands attends. :/

last year MFA increased the maximum number of bands allowed at the Super Regional - prior years always had a wait list. 

 

it would appear that many of the programs that routinely go to G Nats have declined to attend - is it because there are 6 Texas 6A programs attending - who knows, - it might just be part of the attendance cycle of those programs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would appear that many of the programs that routinely go to G Nats have declined to attend - is it because there are 6 Texas 6A programs attending - who knows, - it might just be part of the attendance cycle of those programs

Most of the larger, more big-name programs that aren’t attending this year (BA, Tarpon, Wando) are on a scheduled off year from what I can tell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...